Kamala Harris Drops Out – Who should be next? | 2020 Election | QT Politics

Kamala Harris Drops Out – Who should be next? | 2020 Election | QT Politics


As the crowded democratic primary race for
the 2020 election rages on, voters appear to be coalescing around a narrowing field
of realistic choices. The tier 1 choices at the moment appear to
be Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg. These four candidates are the top four in
the national polls, each with more than 10% support, according to the rcp averages, and
each has their own advantages. Joe Biden has probably the best name recognition
in the field, and is polling in first nation-wide. Bernie Sanders has raised the most money from
supporters, and has the greatest number of donors. Elizabeth Warren is the only candidate to
have, although briefly, surpassed Biden in the national polls, leads in her home state
of Massachusetts, and remains in second in Nevada, South Carolina, and California. Pete Buttigieg is currently surging nation-wide,
and leads in both Iowa and New Hampshire. It would difficult for any candidate not already
in the top four to break through at this stage of the game, but that doesn’t mean that everyone
else in the race should pack their bags. Andrew Yang, for instance, has shown remarkable
progress for a political outsider, and the longer he fights on, the more seriously mainstream
democrats are to take his central issues: data rights, automation, and universal basic
income. While there are good reasons to cast a cynical
eye on Bloomberg’s run, his financial power is formidable to say the least. Deval Patrick, too, just joined the race—and
while I doubt his experience at Mitt Romney’s vulture capitalist firm, Bain Capital, will
do much to earn him a place in the hearts of democratic voters—it may be a tad too
early to totally dismiss him out of hand. With a number of candidates recently dropping
out, Wayne Messam, Joe Sestak, Steve Bullock, and Kamala Harris, it seems reasonable to
ask… Who should be next? Tom Steyer has managed to make it onto the
debate stage twice, now, passing the polling and fundraising thresholds set by the DNC. For most, his appearances have been somewhat
overwhelming. But if he’s doing so bad in the debates, you
may ask, how has he managed to do well enough in the polls, and in fundraising, to make
it onto the debate stage at all? Well, unlike most of the candidates, Steyer’s
campaign is astoundingly self-funded. While most candidates release ads, in part,
to fill their campaign’s coffers, Steyer is losing astronomical amounts of money with
every ad buy. According to CNN, by October 10th, he had
spent over 30 million dollars on ads across televison and social media. As a result, he raised a paultry 2 million
dollars from less than 160,000 unique donors. Meaning, for every dollar he spends in ads,
he takes in less than 7 cents. Not exactly a promising return on investment. A businessman should know better. But, of course, Steyer’s goal is not to get
his message out there so that the people will help fund his campaign. His goal is to directly earn support from
uncommitted or uninformed voters through ads purchased from his own pocket book. His wager is, essentially, that he can buy
his way into the White House. This graph from 538 shows the ad spending
of different campaigns. Steyer’s ads are represented in green. As you can see, while Steyer remains a relatively
minor candidate in polling and fundraising, he is outspending his primary rivals many
times over. At the current count, Steyer has already spent
a whopping 46 million dollars. That’s a massive figure, but no suprise, given
Steyer is a billionaire, and in 2016 was the second-biggest Democratic donor in the presidential
race. Now, if we extend the graph just slightly,
to today, we see the big problem for Steyer. There’s another Billionaire in the race, one
with even more money than Steyer, who actually topped the charts as the number one biggest
Democratic donor in the 2016 race. Michael Bloomberg, in the last week of November,
and in December so far, is putting his resources at work, outspending even Steyer, many times
over. He’s already spent $31 million. If Steyer’s strategy is to just use his money
to outspend everyone else in the field, Bloomberg seems to be the only guy who can out do him. He’s quite simply got more money to burn. On top of that, Bloomberg’s spending is more
likely to drive his standings in the polls and with donors. He may be quite unpopular amongst Democrats,
but at least Bloomberg has experience beyond funding campaigns. He’s got actual executive experience, having
served as the Mayor of New York. Not exactly sufficient experience for most
Presidential hopefulls, but it is more than Steyer, and more than Pete Buttigieg, who
is currently showing strong promise in the National and Early State polls. Without original policy ideas, strong debate
chops, or experience in politics, he’s got virtually zero chance of catching fire as
a candidate organically. His only advantage has been his ability to
self-fund his campaign. Bloomberg’s entry in the race totally eliminates
that advantage. Not only should Steyer drop out, he should
do so ASAP, because unlike with most democratic candidates, it’s his own money he’s wasting. From the ultimate political insider, to the
ultimate outsider, Marianne Williamson should also drop out of the race. Williamson has said that she’s going to stay
in the race until the money dries up. Bless her heart. I love the orb mother, but it’s hard to imagine
that her campaign has any reason left to exist at this point. Early on, Williamson was able to get onto
the debate stage, and bring up her issues. At times, she even had reasonably good performances. She can even take partial credit for the fact
that one of her top issues, reparations, became a topic of conversation in the debates—enough
so that even Pete Buttigieg, who enjoys very little support from the Black community—would
attempt to win over black voters with his Douglass Plan. Despite having no experience in politics,
Williamson managed to make a bit of a mark. She should be proud of what she’s done, and
hang her hat on it. Now, there’s very little else she can do. Polling at .4 percent in the RCP averages,
she has no hope of returning to the debate stage, or gaining more attention in the mainstream
media, as the field narrows in on more serious prospects. Like Marianne Williamson, Michael Bennet is
no longer likely to gain any real attention in the mainstream media, or make it on stage
for future debates. Despite his past debate appearances, he’s
failed to make his mark, and is currently polling at .8% in the RCP averages. He was also one of the lowest-fundraising
candidates in the 3rd quarter, but for some reason he’s pledged to stay in the race, at
least until New Hampshire. There’s no reason for him to do that. As Colorado’s senior US Senator, he’s got
bigger fish to fry than a campaign going no where slowly. John Delaney’s reasons to drop out are so
numerous that a small wonder he even remembers what it was like to be on the campaign trail. Sure, unlike Bennet, he’s got little else
going on in his political career, having concluded his work in the House of Representatives in
January. But like Bennet and Williamson, his appearances
in the early Democratic debates gained him little traction. He is currently polling at just .6 percent
in the RCP averages: that’s 25% less than Bennett—although with numbers this small,
his total support is well within the margin of error for most polls. Delaney’s run is also comparable to Steyer,
as before Steyer came around, Delaney was the self-funded candidate. Delaney’s campaign is actually one of the
better funded ones—with over 27 million dollars. All but 3 million of that, however, came from
his own bank account. If Steyer should drop out, now that a bigger
self-funded campaign has entered the contest, it’s astounding that Delaney hasn’t caught
on that he’s wasting his money. Having launched his campaign all the way back
in July of 2017, Delaney has been in this race for literal years longer than the major
candidates. The only benefit to his enduring efforts would
be a Guinness World Record for longest-lived campaign failure. Although a far more plausible candidate than
anyone I have mentioned so far, Amy Klobuchar might seriously consider dropping out as well. When it comes to fundraising, she’s raised
about the same amount as Beto O’Rourke, who has already left the race. Polling-wise, she’s in 8th place, with 2.4%
in the RCP averages—not exactly remarkable for an experienced US Senator. And all of this is after two debates where
she clearly performed significantly better than she had previously done. If Klobuchar was going to surge into serious
contention, she would’ve done so already. The real trouble with Klobuchar is that she
offers very little not already offered by a higher-polling candidate. You want an experienced politician with moderate
ideology? You’ve got that with Joe Biden, the leader
in the national polls. Are you a moderate who thinks Biden’s better
days are behind him? Well, in fourth place, and surging in the
early states, you’ve got Pete Buttigieg—who clearly represents a new generation of moderate
dems, far more convincingly than Klobuchar. Do you not care about ideology, and are instead
focused on gender?, you want a woman president? Well, your best bet in that case would be
Elizabeth Warren. She’s in third place nationally, and in the
first two states. Booker, too, is showing weak numbers in the
polls, even after the 5th Democratic Debate, where he delivered what was probably his best
performance in the primary race so far. He’s polled at just 1 or 2 percent since then,
retaining an overall rcp average of just 1.8%. In terms of fundraising, he’s raised about
18 and a half million, and spend 14, meaning he’s not saving up much cash on hand for an
ad blitz in the offing. Booker has a ton of charisma, and solid experience,
but it appears that voters just aren’t buying what he’s selling. To paraphrase an expression Booker used in
a dazzling debate moment, he’s selling the Kool Aid but nobody wants the flavor. Julian Castro’s campaign has shown a number
of signs of impending doom. He’s begun to struggle to make the thresholds
required to make the debates, and as I’ve previously reported, he’s shutting down what
ought to be major campaign operations in New Hampshire and South Carolina. Sure, the official line is that this is to
focus on other critical states, like Iowa (where he his polling in 12th place), Nevada
(where he is polling in 10th place) and his native Texas (where he is polling in 7th place)… But with less than a million dollars cash
on hand, and declining presence in the press, it’s hard to see his prospects as anything
other than a wild long shot. The reality is that, despite being a recurrently
forceful presence on the debate stage, Castro was essentially put in a no-win situation
after his infamous clash with Joe Biden. After asking Biden “did you forget what
you said two minutes ago?”–and repeating that line of attack—the mainstream press
repeatedly reported the encounter as Castro making a distasteful swipe at Biden’s age. In my opinion, Castro was correct in calling
Biden out, and I broke that down in my analysis of the debate at the time. But I would go on to predict that Castro would
suffer in the polls, and that in the next debate, he’d be between a rock and a hard
place: he would have to chose to double down on his aggressive debate style—one of his
only advantages in the primary race—or bend to media pressure, and soften his approach. Castro seemed to do the latter. As a result, his last appearance on a debate
stage was unremarkable, and the low-polling candidate was lost in the shuffle. It may seem a little mean spirited to suggest
that many of the long shot campaigns should end soon, but as the primaries and caucuses
draw nearer, pruning the crowded field may be extremely useful for democratic voters. Crowded debates tend to translate into little
substance, as minor candidates attempt to make their mark with attacks on the major
players, who themselves benefit most by conveying as little meaning as possible—in order to
avoid rocking the boat. With numerous candidates, it also becomes
next to impossible for working Americans to sufficiently research each of their available
options. In this way, dropping out of the race is not
just the right thing to do in terms of time, and energy, and resources for a variety of
candidates—it is also the right thing to do, morally, for Democratic voters, and the
American people. For that reason, I will end this video honouring
the departed campaigns of the patriots who have respected the voters enough to remove
themselves from the race. But of the fifteen candidates still taking
up valuable air time, I ask, how many are wasting everybody’s time? How many are continuing on out of sheer vanity,
stubbornness, and fantasy?, and how many actually have a message worth listening to? And of those, how many really deserve serious
consideration? The Democratic Party has not always opted
for the best choice when it comes to presidential nominees. It may be time for the long shots to step
aside, so that the voters can inform themselves about the realistic options, and decide… Who should be next?

Posts created 26054

100 thoughts on “Kamala Harris Drops Out – Who should be next? | 2020 Election | QT Politics

  1. I appreciate you giving Yang the credit he deserves! I think your analysis is spot on with all the other candidates as well.

  2. Wait, did you mention literally every candidate except Tulsi? 💀 At least she's in the top 9 (just 1 poll away from making the December debate, like Yang)
    Oh yay, at least she was shown ending Kamala here 😉

  3. I disagree with your premise that people should drop out. There are realistic reasons for people to drop out (e.g., running out of money or a drug deal for a VP spot), but if a candidate wants to stay in the race until the Democratic convention makes their choice, then so be it. Tom Steyer obviously has money to burn, so let him. In December 2003, the eventual democratic nominees of Kerry & Edwards were at 8% and 5%, respectively (at 5th/6th [tied with Al Sharpton] and 7th place, respectively, out of 10 hopefuls). Numbers don't start really mattering until 3 February.

  4. I got so much nostalgia when Tulsi was ripping apart Kamala on her law enforcement record. She just looked dead inside as if she was about to cry.
    May her campaign rest in pieces.

  5. 09:43 Cory Booker has a skeleton in the closet. He voted against a bill that would allow importing cheaper pharmaceuticals from Canada. Now see which industry donated to him at https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2019/jul/02/donald-trump/cory-booker-and-drug-maker-campaign-cash-numbers/

  6. the ending was pretty great.
    I think everyone besides the top 4 and yang should drop out.
    I dont understand anyone's fascination with Gabbard(although I did like how she just literally left Harris speechless).
    Gabbard and Castro are my two least favorite candidates running

  7. Don't get me wrong, Booker is a corporate neoliberal centrist that would never win and I would never support, but gosh darnit I really like the guy as a person, I will be sad to see him go (which will likely be soon)

  8. So that leaves the following candidates:

    Joe Biden
    Bernie Sanders
    Elizabeth Warren
    Pete Buttigieg
    Michael Bloomberg
    Andrew Yang
    Tulsi Gabbard
    Deval Patrick

  9. I think the next drop out will be Michael Bennet. Marianne won’t last past early January. Delaney will stay till the primary solely because he can. Patrick will realize he’s wasting his time and drop out before the early state primaries. Castro will drop out in January, or MAYBE around Christmas. Booker will leave by February. Klobuchar will probably stick around till Super Tuesday. The rest are there for the long haul or at least until after Super Tuesday

  10. Was that comment of “not caring about ideology and wanting a female president” targeted towards Warren serious? That sounds really out of character for you.

  11. I really like your videos and I understand that you're a Bernie supporter, but I'm disappointed at how much you're bias has been showing in recent videos. I generally try to find videos that are neutral enough to give every candidate a fair shake, but that seems to be missing from your recent videos.

  12. Telling Steyer, Booker, and Klobuchar to drop out but not Tulsi? She's polling lower than them! The bias is so clear here.

  13. Bloomberg looking to outspend the entire Dem field from Q1-Q3 by the end of 2019, despite only running about 5 weeks 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀

  14. I really love this channel. I have gained so much knowledge from it. Another great video that represents exactly what I was curious about. If more Americans were into politics, this would be a channel with at least a million subscribers.

  15. I don't want to be a defeatist but…..Trump will be re-elected. This crop of candidates are simply not strong enough to take on the Orange Oligarch.

  16. I actually think once Buttigieg faces real scrutiny in a debate, the msm could switch to going all out on propping up Klobuchar. I think she should stay in as much as I can’t stand her. They spent a long time trying to make Buttigieg happen before they went all in during/after Warren’s fall. I think the same could happen again

  17. Can we please just get Booty-Boy out of here?

    Good lord I don’t like how smarmy and fake he is- not that it isn’t typical in politics but I hate how his whole schtick is pretending to not be that.

  18. Who should leave? I guess that depends on what you mean by "should." If you mean that the people who should leave are the ones who don't have a prayer of winning then your list is spot on. If you mean "should" as in "who are the people who ought to leave because they are terrible and leaving would be the only moral thing to do?" In that case, I think the list goes like this.

    1) Pete Buttigieg (horrible guy, totally dishonest)
    2) Michael Bloomberg (racist plutocrat)
    3) Tom Steyer (wants to buy an election)
    4) John Delaney (totally against the Democratic party)
    5) Joe Biden (awful record and terrible candidate)
    6) Amy Klobuchar (utterly uninspired)
    7) Michael Bennett (also utterly uninspired)
    8) Deval Patrick (totally not the guy for the modern Democratic Party)
    9) Corey Booker (fake and corrupt)
    10) Julian Castro (not as bad as the rest but still a step backwards)

  19. Question Time viewers: who should leave the democratic primaries now?
    Question Time: if you're not the big 4, then everyone

  20. Andrew Yang deserves way more media attention for the support he's getting. He sometimes gets omitted from certain polls.

  21. You’re not very credible when everybody knows you’re for Bernie and then always bring up Pete and the black vote when everybody aside from Biden, including Bernie at like 10% only after 30 years in Congress, is struggling with black voters. You’re biased and bothered because bernie won’t win, again 🤷🏽‍♀️

  22. Bennet is so shit. The only thing he actually gives a damn about is climate change…. and yet manages to do basically nothing of worth to help deal with it.

  23. As a texas resident, i still don't understand why tf im getting Bloomberg ads. Dont they understand this state is solid red?

  24. Tulsi Gabbard should drop out and run for head agitator. I don’t know if I hate her or respect her but she def gets emotions out of me.

  25. I feel like saying Buttigieg leads in NH is a bit silly as the only poll finding him in the lead had a tiny sample size and put Bernie at 9% while all other polls put Bernie in the lead.

  26. Only five candidates still matter. Biden, Sanders, Waren, Buttigieg and Yang. All others have nothing to offer and have no chances of winning the nomination.

  27. "The Democratic Party has not always opted for the best choice"
    … I really wish QT specified who he meant by this comment. Seems like he had someone in mind

  28. Get rid of these boring moderates. No one cares about Third Way any more – it does nothing and its horrendously insufficient for what America actually needs in terms of political and economic reform. All they tend to rattle on about it how Trump = bad, anyway, which as a tactic to win votes, it just won't do to push a win.

  29. Tier 1 choice is Bernie Sanders
    Tier 2…
    Tier 3…

    Tier 4 choice is Elizabeth Warren (the Public option BS for the first 3 years of her term and M4A only for her last term placed her here along with all the other BS she's been doing, like taking corporate money [10.4 million] from 2018 and transferring it into this primary and saying that she'll take large donations [corporate money] during the general election)

    Tier 5 choices Joe Biden, Pete Buttigieg
    Had this system have been better it probably would have left the top more open to other non establishment candidates but this is so far how this system is turned out.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Begin typing your search term above and press enter to search. Press ESC to cancel.

Back To Top